The inadequacy of traditional causation criteria in addressing cases of psychological influence requires the adoption of complementary criteria of objective imputation. The causal theories currently applied in Brazilian law, when used in isolation, fail to provide adequate answers to the complex issues that emerge from contemporary social dynamics. The systematization of cases into two main categories—harm to an individual’s own interests by the second causer and damages caused to third parties—allows for the identification and application of specific imputation criteria, such as the purpose of the legal norm’s protection, the materialization of the risk created, the proportionality of the act committed, the self-responsibility of the second causer, and the position of authority of the initial perpetrator. A comparative jurisprudential analysis between German and Brazilian decisions demonstrates the relevance of solutions that, while compatible with Brazilian law, take into account the particularities of each group of cases through the coordinated and balanced application of the different criteria of objective imputation developed by the doctrine.